California OAH special education order · February 29, 2024
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Is Sufficient
OAH Case No. 2024020433 · ALJ Marlo Nisperos
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient on all seven claims because it identified the issues and gave South Pasadena enough facts to respond and take part in resolution and mediation.
Summary
South Pasadena filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. OAH found the complaint alleged facts sufficient to raise seven claims arising on or after February 13, 2022, and gave South Pasadena enough information to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Because Student did not allege any claims arising before that date, or facts to extend the two-year statute of limitations, the hearing period begins February 13, 2022. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
OAH reads complaints liberally, so a district's insufficiency challenge often fails. Parents who want to reach back more than two years must allege specific facts supporting an exception to the statute of limitations, or the older background facts will not extend the hearing period.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed. Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006)
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024020433
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT IS
SUFFICIENT
FEBRUARY 29, 2024
On February 13, 2024, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming South Pasadena Unified School District. On February 28, 2024, South Pasadena filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
A complaint is sufficient if it: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess.
(2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108- 185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept.
10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. Opn.]; Escambia County Bd. Of Educ. V. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. Of Educ. (3d Cir.
2009) 306 Fed.Appx. 772, 775 [nonpub. Opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. Of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient to raise seven claims that arose on or after February 13, 2022, two years before the complaint was filed. Student did not allege that any of the claims occurred before February 13, 2022, but the complaint included facts that predate the statutory period. The time period for the hearing begins February 13, 2022, because Student did not allege any claims arose before then or facts to support extending the statute of limitations in this matter.
Student’s complaint identifies the issues and adequate facts about the problem to permit South Pasadena to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation.
Therefore, Student’s statement of the seven claims is sufficient.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Marlo Nisperos Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings